IMPACT OF THE CREDIT-MODULAR TRAINING SYSTEM ON THE PERFORMANCE EFFECTIVENESS OF GENERAL PRACTITIONERS
Keywords:
general practitioners; medical education; credit-modular system; diagnostic accuracy; patient satisfactionAbstract
Introduction. The modernization of medical education has led to the widespread adoption of the credit-modular system (CMS), which emphasizes practical, competency-based training. However, evidence regarding its effect on the clinical effectiveness of medical graduates remains limited.
Objective. To evaluate the impact of CMS on the professional performance outcomes of general practitioners compared to the traditional education model.
Materials and Methods. This cohort comparative study included 127 general practitioners who began practicing within one year after graduation. The first group (n=62) was trained under the CMS, while the second group (n=65) followed a traditional curriculum. Evaluation was based on an integrated performance score (comprising clinical, organizational, and communication effectiveness) and a range of secondary indicators: patient load, diagnostic accuracy, protocol adherence, clinical outcomes, and patient satisfaction.
Results. CMS-trained graduates demonstrated better results across all major domains: they managed more patients per month on average (412 vs. 385, p=0.018), had lower hospitalization rates (18.2 vs. 24.6 per 1,000 patients, p=0.033), and made fewer errors in ECG and laboratory interpretation. Patient satisfaction was also significantly higher in the CMS group (4.3 vs. 3.9, p=0.004).
Conclusion. The credit-modular training system provides higher clinical effectiveness, professional autonomy, and patient satisfaction compared to the traditional model and may be considered a promising format for future medical education.
References
Aulakh J, Sharma M, Anand S, Sidhu G. Self-Directed Learning versus Traditional Didactic Learning: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in Undergraduate Medical Education. BMC Med Educ. 2025; In press. [PMCID: PMC11737201].
Ayuob NN, Eldeek BS, Alshawa LA, Al-Saba AF, Alzahrani FM, et al. Interdisciplinary Integration of the Cardiovascular System Module and Its Effect on Faculty and Student Satisfaction as Well as Student Performance. BMC Med Educ. 2012;12:50. doi:10.1186/1472-6920-12-50.
Bhavsar MH, Patel HV, Parmar P, Jain SM. Flipped Classroom versus Traditional Didactic Classroom in Medical Teaching: A Comparative Study. Cureus. 2022;14(8):e28273. doi:10.7759/cureus.28273.
Harwood KJ, Suen W, Nelson MJ. Comparing Student Outcomes in Traditional vs Intensive, Online Courses in Medical Education. BMC Med Educ. 2018;18:1343. doi:10.1186/s12909-018-1343-7.
Khan MA, Rehman A, Noor-ul-Huda, Shah SS. A Comparative Study of UHS New Modular vs. Traditional Teaching Method in Medical Sciences. J Pak Teach Clin Pract. 2023;3(1). Available from: https://jptcp.com/index.php/jptcp/article/view/5440
Liu K, Liu S, Ma Y, Jiang J, Liu Z, Wan Y. Comparison of Blended Learning and Traditional Lecture Method on Learning Outcomes in the Evidence-Based Medicine Course: A Comparative Study. BMC Med Educ. 2024;24:680. doi:10.1186/s12909-024-05659-w.
Ostrovsky DA, Heflin MT, Bowers MT, Hanson LC, et al. Development, Implementation, and Assessment of an Online Modular Telehealth Curriculum for Health Professions Students. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2024;15:569–578. doi:10.2147/AMEP.S468833.
Yang HF, Tan CS, Nguyen TMT, et al. Effectiveness of Innovative Instructional Module for Medical Students’ Professional Competence in Health Literacy. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22:216. doi:10.1186/s12909-022-03364-2.
